I spent a good seventeen minutes this morning staring at the acoustic paneling above my desk, meticulously counting the perforated squares in one tile. There were 234 of them, arranged in neat, predictable rows. The uniformity was mesmerizing, and frankly, deeply desirable right now. That kind of perfect, predictable function is entirely absent from the professional contract we call a Job Description.
The Diagnosis: Marketing vs. Mandate
The Job Description is not a contract. It is a marketing document, written to inflate perceived organizational importance and justify a salary band, designed to attract candidates who will eventually feel profoundly betrayed.
I was thinking about Sarah. She was hired as a Data Scientist at a logistics firm. The JD was a symphony of modern vocabulary: architecting machine learning solutions, deploying sophisticated predictive models, leveraging proprietary Python libraries. It promised disruption. It promised brilliance. When she finally quit, eight months later, she told me the actual breakdown of her time, measured meticulously in an attempt to justify her increasing panic. She spent 94% of her week performing manual data hygiene. Not cleaning data, mind you, but begging four different legacy department heads for access to their systems, then wrestling four separate, poorly formatted CSV files-manually exported by people who hated each other and didn’t care about standardization-into a singular, usable spreadsheet. She was a glorified, highly paid janitor for digital waste. Her actual core task, the predictive modeling, consumed less than 4% of her working hours.
The Reality Split (Sarah’s Time Allocation)
94% Sludge
6% Glamour
They sell the potential; you buy the reality.
The Original Betrayal
The first job I took after college promised a “Strategic Analyst” role. I genuinely imagined high-stakes boardrooms and complex financial modeling. I was so convinced by the lyrical prose of the JD that I accepted a relocation package and a salary of $474 a week, believing the title alone was currency. I got a windowless basement office next to the supplies closet and the job of manually updating pivot tables that hadn’t generated strategic insight since 2004. I stayed for 14 months, driven solely by the irrational, corrosive hope that the description would magically manifest itself. It never did.
That betrayal-the gap between the advertised job and the performed job-is where organizational trust goes to die.
That betrayal-the gap between the advertised job and the performed job-is where organizational trust goes to die. When the employee shows up on Day One, they realize they were sold a heavily filtered, 14-year-old version of the role. The company has already committed a profound breach, and then they wonder why engagement scores across the organization drop 44 points the following year. It’s simple mathematics of expectation versus delivery.
The Weight of Inaccuracy
My grandfather, Max B.-L., was a meticulous restorer of antique grandfather clocks. He didn’t have a JD; he had an oath. When he took apart a movement-the escapement, the weights, the pendulum-he knew the precise function of every single tiny brass gear. If a component was supposed to regulate time, that’s what it did. If it was designed to chime on the hour, that was its sole, honest purpose. Everything was true to its design.
Optimization vs. Integrity
Compromised stability by chemical polish.
Stabilized micro-etching maintained lifespan.
I once tried to help him polish a mainspring housing. I was in a hurry and used a strong chemical polish, thinking I was optimizing the time it took. He didn’t yell; he just held the piece up to the light, showing me how the chemical had dissolved micro-etching that stabilized the steel, compromising its lifespan by decades. I was trying to optimize a process that wasn’t broken, a mistake organizations make constantly when they hire a ‘disruptor’ into a role that only requires careful, honest maintenance. I still feel the shame of ruining that piece of history by imposing my own fictional narrative of efficiency onto reality.
The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy
And here’s the necessary, painful contradiction: I criticize organizations for writing fictional JDs, yet when I hire people, I catch myself using the same ridiculous, aspirational verbs. I find myself writing, “Must be able to leverage cross-functional synergies and architect stakeholder buy-in.” I hate those words. They mean nothing. But I use them because the competitive market demands that we dress up the difficult, messy, real job in the lyrical fiction of success. I do exactly what I criticize, hoping that *my* version of the fiction is slightly less dishonest than the next company’s-a terrible hope, based entirely on self-deception.
The Market Price of Fiction
This happens because the organizational structure of JDs is almost always based on *hope*, not on *historical data*. We describe the utopian 4% of the job, the part that sounds good at dinner parties.
We sell a Ferrari but deliver a rusted bicycle with great potential for optimization. We wonder why the driver is perpetually demoralized.
Unbilled Cognitive Overhead
Constant Translation
The energy required to reconcile fantasy with mundane reality.
This phenomenon isn’t driven by laziness; it’s driven by proportional response to professional deception. Employees stop trying to achieve the fictional 4% because the organization has failed to deliver the support, clarity, and resources required. They fulfill the absolute minimum of the actual, unwritten job-the spreadsheets, the cleanup, the meeting scheduling-and nothing more. That is quiet quitting by resignation, not malice.
The Cost: Trust vs. Sludge
How much institutional trust is worth the difference between 4% glamour and 94% sludge?
Comments are closed